For decades, the adoption and use of the latest technologies was limited to a subculture: Whether called tech enthusiasts or gadget geeks, the implication was that most of the world got along fine with older, established products and services, while a smaller group pursued the most leading-edge technology.

But according to a study released Wednesday by Forrester Research, a marketing firm based in Cambridge, Mass., a shift has taken place. What used to be the pursuit of a few has become decidedly mainstream. Were all gadget geeks now.

According to the study, which surveyed 53,668 households in the United States and Canada by mail, half of all American adults are gamers. Sixty-three percent of American households have a broadband Internet connection. Three-quarters of American households have cellphones and PCs. And nearly 10 million American households, outof nearly 118 million, added an HDTV in the last year, a jump of 27 percent over 2007.

Click to expand...

The fact that only 63% of American homes have broadband is going to be used as evidence that "we're all gadget geeks now?" Really? Or having a cell-phone qualifies one as an "early adopter" in 2009?

My impression of the article: A naive writer regurgitated a press release from the company that conducted this "amazing" survey.

Click to expand...

True... usually the Times is above this. I'm pretty surprised though, by some of the numbers, unless they're being confusingly represented. There's the statement that 75% of homes have cellphones (unless they mean that 75% of homes have both a cellphone and a PC), but other sources peg this number as higher... for instance...

I think the article is more about America becoming part of the early adopter set; and attempting to link the use of tech to a broader acceptance of innovation. However, the article quotes data from technology use where all but HDTV have been available for decade or so, rather than the latest "latest technologies" that are available to consumers.

I'd frankly be happy if America would 'adopt' technologies like the metric system and the letter 'u' in words like 'colour' and 'rumour'.

I'd frankly be happy if America would 'adopt' technologies like the metric system and the letter 'u' in words like 'colour' and 'rumour'.

Click to expand...

Good luck with that! I just read (an excellent, btw) book written by an Indian who had settled down in South London, which takes place in South India, and the temperatures were all referenced in degrees Fahrenheit.

I think Imperial is making a comeback!

Of course, seriously, the conflict to me is that there is early adoption in the United States. I would think even the most jaded European would have to admit that the way that the App Store (and in the US before anywhere else) took off is an example of Americans being tech friendly. Twitter, MySpace, and Facebook all began in the US. And there are others, although none of them are referenced in the article.

I was mostly enjoying the delicious irony... especially the frequent references to HDTV. I think anyone would agree that the process that led to the ultimate adoption of HDTV in the US is the worst example one can think of Americans adopting new tech in a quick and orderly fashion.

I was mostly enjoying the delicious irony... especially the frequent references to HDTV. I think anyone would agree that the process that led to the ultimate adoption of HDTV in the US is the worst example one can think of Americans adopting new tech in a quick and orderly fashion.

Click to expand...

Ah yes, that was a mess but the problem was slightly bigger than adaptation; it was a change in industry standards and the attempt at keeping the consumer informed and happy during the transition. ....Which didn't turn out so well... Lessons to be learned for next time I guess.

As for HDTVs, I remember going to a high end home theater showroom and seeing some demo sets back in 1997 or 1998. It was pretty difficult to be an early adopter considering most of the tech was roughly $20,000 to $30,000.

This article/study is pretty stupid. Its comparing yesterdays early adoption standards to todays times. Cell phones? HDTVs? Broadband internet? These things have been around in some cases for decades. Owning any of these things hardly makes you an "early adopter." They may still be luxuries for some people/places but then, so is clean water and shelter. So if others dont have clean water and shelter, are they not early adopters? lol.

An early adopter/tech geek in 2009 is going to have for one example, a house wired such that he/she can adjust the hvac, lights, sprinkler system, as well as home theater and audio, etc from a single panel or even remotely via an internet connection. This is one example... just something that is high tech, unproved technology that is likely still expensive and the majority of people have hardly even heard about.

The reason the LATER stages of adoption happen at all here in the US when it may not happen as fast or as deeply as in other countries is due to our relative wealth. Per captia the US is obviously up there and can hence afford to buy such things, as they gain in popularity and drop in price. If anything all the technologies they described are in the late adoption or laggard phase. (see the attached for you non marketing majors out there that havent had this drilled into your brain lol http://www.learnmarketing.net/diffusion.htm )

Point is, this article fails to show any evidence that rate of adoption in the US has sped up due to being more technically inclined as they suggest. Instead I think adoption rate is the same it has always been in the US, with wealth being the biggest differentiators when comparing us to other countries.

The stat "10 million out of nearly 118 million homes added an HDTV" or about 8.4% is pretty depressing when you remember that last year was the year that analog TV was deprecated and the only TVs being sold were "HD" sets of one flavor or another. This means that 91% plus decided that TV really wasn't worth it anymore and either bought the $60 box or killed their television, minus the scant few percent that had HD sets already (though they're likely included in the 8.4%, buying HD sets for other rooms in the house).

This means that 91% plus decided that TV really wasn't worth it anymore and either bought the $60 box or killed their television, minus the scant few percent that had HD sets already (though they're likely included in the 8.4%, buying HD sets for other rooms in the house).

Click to expand...

Well... what percentage of Americans use OTA antennas with their television? Not that I love my cable company, but I haven't done that in years. Cable was unaffected by the switch.

FWIW though I dropped cable when I moved back to MI this summer and now I have my (HD)TV connected to a PC which can stream over the internet but no cable, and I still don't have it connected to an OTA antenna....

If somehow we are a nation of early adopters (i can almost guarantee that the majority of americans arent) I think cell phones have brought it around. People get so used to getting a new gadget practically yearly if not more.

I still have 4 CRT TV's that are standard definition. We do not have a single HDTV. One is so old that it does not go above channel 13. We just don't really watch much TV. We are in the US too.

Click to expand...

What drives me crazy is that my office at Chicago had a 15" CRT in it for the computer. It was awful. I felt bad about asking for it to be replaced, but I asked at the end of my internship so that the next intern wouldn't have to deal with it. Now it looks like my new office has one also. I mean, I haven't owned a CRT at home in years... particularly on a computer.

I actually think the biggest debacle of the HDTV conversion was how unwilling the government was to put its foot down and either define standards itself or have someone else do it.

As a result, HDTVs launched in this country without any plan for a OTA tuner at all -- the early ones were just monitors. Then, when they finally started having ATSC tuners, they went through several iterations of idiocy regarding how cable television would be piped into HDTVs (remember CableCard?) and basically, the net result of that was that it's 2009, and while you could and still can use at least some basic level of analog cable television without a cable box, there's still no way to use digital cable without a cable box, now years after digital cable and HDTVs have been on the market.

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.